If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted.
At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post:
the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement.
I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying.
A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market.
Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are.
So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin.
No, you're grasping at straws with that comment